When Steve Jobs announced that the big new feature in iTunes 08 was Genius, a music recommendation service, I, and many others, said: “Huh.”
First of all, this sort of technology has been around for a long long time. It was years (6, 8?) ago that I first used Amazon’s feature to find similar artists based on what people bought. I used that to discover new artists, in fact. More recently, Pandora has introduced some very sophisticated music matching techniques that suggest new music based on the music itself. I’ve also used sites like AllMusic.com to find out which artists I may like.
But Genius fails in a way that Apple is usually very good at — it really feels like it is selling you something. I feel that it is pushing me to buy music, not suggesting music I may like.
It reminds me of my high school job, which was working at a record store. Now I worked at a cool record store. We didn’t go out onto the floor and bother people by trying to sell them more records. (By the way, by “records” I do mean vinyl). But at other stores you’d get some kid trying to suggest something: “Have you heard the latest Smithereens album?”
Genius feels like that. I feel like telling it: “Don’t bother me, kid, I know what I want.”
And what is with the name? A “genius” is how you would describe someone who takes one song and then suggests others? That’s not a “genius” — that’s just Jack Black in High Fidelity.
I’d at least expect it to be smarter than Amazon or Pandora, but most of the suggestions I got were just for other songs by the same artist. And it doesn’t even seem to know that Anna Waronker was in That Dog — there are no suggestions between them.
And what happens if I select a Beatles song? I can’t find anything! That’s weird on so many levels.
And it has nothing to do with my Beatles songs coming from CD instead of the iTunes store — most of my music is that way. It may have to do with The Beatles not being sold on iTunes, but as a music lover I don’t really care about Apple’s legal issues.
Anyway, I’m sure that Genius will help Apple sell more music. It can’t hurt, right? I’m sure that was part of their reasoning.
But now that I’m not reviewing it, I’m turning it off.
So two bits of Spore news. The first is that the iPhone version will not be released until later this month. All reports previously had mentioned that it would be out the same day as the full PC/Mac game.
The second is that the game isn’t “Spore” but “Spore Origins.” It appears to be similar to the first part of the full PC/Mac game where you evolve a single organism floating around in a primordial ooze.
We’ve got to point out how we predicted this back in March in the post Why We Won’t Really See Spore on the iPhone. The second bit of news, in the same press release by EA, is that the game will use the iPhone-specific controls: the motion sensor, and pinching and pulling on the multi-touch screen. This should make for a unique experience on the iPhone and iPod Touch. There are supposed to be 2 modes and 35 levels — we’ll see what that means when the game comes out.
Meanwhile, Spore Origins has been released for the iPod Video, Classic and iPod Nano third-generation.
Electronic Arts also announced several other titles for the iPhone in the same press release, but no specific release dates: Yahtzee Adventures, EA Mini Golf, Lemonade Tycoon, Mahjong, Monopoly: Here & Now The World Edition, SimCity, Tiger Woods PGA TOUR 09, Need for Speed Undercover, and The Sims 3. SimCity, in particular could be a powerful game on the iPhone.
Update: Spore Origins is out and costs $9.99 at the iTunes App Store. It is basically just the first part of Spore, where you float around in the primordial ooze.
Next month Comcast cable modem customers will have to start watching their bandwidth. The large Internet provider has announced that they will limit users to 250GB per month of data transfer. Previously, users have had unlimited data transfer, although there are many reports of heavy users being kicked off the service when they hit an invisible limit.
Now 250GB is a lot of data. If you downloaded one HD movie per day, at 5GB per movie, it would add up to 150GB. If you streamed live video at .5MB per second for two hours each day, it would be about 216GB. If you downloaded a new version of your entire operating system every day, it would be about 180GB.
So 250GB is hard to hit. Now. For most people. But soon it will be easier. And we want it to be easier. People are creating more and more content — video content — for online distribution. It is not hard to subscribe to 10, 20 or even 50 video podcasts, updating each day or week, all with hundreds of MB or even GB in file size.
And the idea from the creator’s side is to get viewers. People are trying all sorts of different shows: news programs, comedy, vlogs, commentary, artistic, etc. This is a renaissance period for video, where all it takes is an idea, talent and hard work to make something, not a million dollar budget.
But if a large portion of the Internet audience suddenly starts watching their bandwidth, counting each byte for fear of losing their Internet connection, then they will stop download video because it looks interesting. They will get more picky, sticking with what they know and avoiding new things.
And this won’t just stay with Comcast. Since they took the first step, expect others to follow. Other cable providers will look at this as a way to set bandwidth limits without causing a fuss, because Comcast did it first. And competing services like DSL will do the same, claiming that they need to match Comcast’s service terms to remain competitive.
And don’t forget that Internet video is the primary reason, I’m sure, for this bandwidth cap. Or at least it will be the primary victim. And what is Comcast’s primary business? Video. So this is an anti-competitive move. There is no bandwidth limit on Comcast’s video services, only on the Internet, which competes with Comcast’s cable channels.
So we might be seeing the beginning of the end here. The end to innovation and creativity in Internet video. Soon it may require big budgets again, at least in marketing, to get your video noticed by the bandwidth-strangled public. Noticed enough that they are willing to spend some of their precious byte allotment to risk seeing if your show is worthwhile.
A lot of tech journalists this week are talking about computer maker Psystar’s counter lawsuit against Apple. Psystar has been making and selling Mac clones for a few months now. They put together standard PC parts and install Mac OS X on it. The only problem being that Apple doesn’t allow Mac OS X to be installed on non-Mac computers, according to the license.
So it was only a matter of time before Apple sued to stop Psystar. What’s interesting is that Psystar is fighting back by claiming that Apple has created an illegal monopoly by insisting that Mac OS X only gets to run on Apple-made hardware.
So this brings up the question: Why doesn’t Apple like Psystar and other manufacturers install OS X on their machines? After all, it is a sale for Apple.
Apple did do this for a while in the 90s. And it didn’t help Apple much at all. Those clones were a little cheaper, but quality was an issue. Steve Jobs put a stop to it as soon as he returned to Apple.
I think quality is again the issue. OS X has an advantage over Windows. Windows needs to know how to run on a lot of different hardware configurations: processors, video cards, sound cards, motherboards, buses, etc. But OS X only needs to run using a very finite set of these things. This allows Apple to spend less time getting OS X to work on every possible configuration, and more time getting it to work well on the configurations that they know and control.
I think the plan is to make sure that OS X is a good experience for users, wherever OS X runs. ANd if it is allowed to run on non-Apple hardware, then Apple looses control over that experience.
I think the guys at Apple are smart and have run the numbers. They see they can make a little more by selling OS X to other manufacturers, but that they will loose customer satisfaction in the long run.
I don’t see a monopoly here, I see the opposite. You can choose between Windows, OS X and Linux. The first is a general operating system not tied to hardware. The second is an OS that is built for specific hardware. The third is an open source solution that can be adapted to fit a need. The market has produced three different operating systems that are distinctly different, and yet all allow you to person the same basic tasks on a personal computer.
I just got back from the Digg Townhall event at the Big Tent set up for the DNC here in Denver. Jay Adelson and Kevin Rose updated the community live via a video feed about upcoming changes to Digg.com and also fielded many questions submitted by the community.
This isn’t too exciting. There’s none of the humor of Diggnation nor the coolness of Digg itself. But it is interesting to see what they have in store.
But what is interesting is the whole idea of reaching out to the community to steer the future of Digg. What other Web 2.0 company does that? Some, I’m sure, but I can’t think of any right now. Twitter seems to like to keep its users in the dark. FaceBook doesn’t make this kind of effort.
And this isn’t a halfhearted attempt at communication, either. They could have made someone the “head of community interaction” and sent them around to do townhall meetings. But instead the CEO and the founder do it. This lends credibility behind statements like “we’re working on that.”
I’d like to see other Web companies try townhall events. They probably don’t because they are afraid people will use it as a way to bitch about bugs and missing features. They will. That’s the point. And you can use that sort of feedback to make yourself better.
So we’re fairly sure there are going to be some Apple announcements soon. Some say on September 9th. But what? Rumors hint toward a shake-up of a product line. But which line and how big of a shake-up?
We’ve got the MacBook line, rumored to be ditching the white and black plastic for aluminum. Not much would differentiate the MacBook and the MacBook Pro then, just some larger numbers for the pro. They would essentially become one line, not two.
It does get confusing now with the MacBook Air in the mix. There are a lot of people not sure which one to get. One is cheap, the other is light, and the third is powerful. But if you want cheap and light, or light and powerful, or cheap and powerful, then you are out of luck. A line of smaller, cheap MacBooks and a line of heavier, powerful and more expensive ones would make sense, but I don’t see that happening so soon after the launch of the Air.
The iMac line is in a similar spot. I don’t see that it is time for a redesign, and there aren’t that many people asking for a more powerful iMac at the moment.
We just got the new iPhone, and and iPod Touch redesign to look like the new iPhone isn’t very exciting.
That leaves the iPod. I think this is where it is at, and it seems the rumors are strong here. A new Nano with a larger screen is the most popular rumor right now.
I see something a little more — something that would make more sense anyway. I think Apple will drop the name “Nano” and just call it the iPod. Think about it: there is no “iPod” right now. There are: iPod Shuffle, iPod Nano, iPod Touch and iPod Classic. For the holidays, it would probably be best for Apple if people could just wish for an “iPod” and shoppers could just buy an “iPod.”
So my thinking is that the new Nano will be called the “iPod.” The shuffle will remain, as will the Touch and the Classic. The only purpose of the Classic at this point is the large hard drive, so it will probably stay at the current configuration for a while and then go away after flash-based iPods reach 64/96GB in storage.
Then, of course, there is the Apple TV. Be interesting if they threw a curve ball and surprised everyone with a new Apple TV. But I don’t think that will happen.
So that leaves the idea of a new product, but something that will be close enough to an existing product like to “shake it up.” So everyone is back to the idea of a touch-screen Mac of some sort. iMac Touch? MacBook Touch? Or a new tablet device that is half-way between an iPod Touch and a MacBook?
What do YOU think? Leave a comment!
NOTE: This is an old article. The ringtones are no longer available via podcast. You can download them all directly here: http://macmost.com/free-iphone-ringtones.
So it looks like putting our MacMost free iPhone ringtones in the iTunes store as a free podcast was a good idea. A lot of people have subscribed. I wanted to do a short blog post about how to get these ringtones on to your iPhone.
1. Go to our iPhone ringtones page at http://macmost.com/iphoneringtones/ and click on the “subscribe to the free iPhone ringtones feed as a podcast” link. This will open iTunes and take you right to the subscription page. Note that iTunes will not show you the ringtones in the list of episodes — a bug in iTunes. But they are there. Click on the Subscribe button.
2. In iTunes, under the Library heading on the left, look for “Podcasts.” Click on that and then look for “MacMost iPhone Ringtones” in the list on the right. Click on the triangle to the left of that to see all of the items under that podcast.
3. Press the Get button next to each of the items you want to add. Or, press the Get All button at the top of the list.
4. Plug your iPhone in to your computer. Let it sync with iTunes.
5. Click on the iPhone in the iTunes list on the left, under Devices. Now you should see your iPhone settings in the main iTunes area. Click on the Podcasts tab.
6. Set your iPhone to sync all episodes of all Podcasts. Or, alternatively, set it to sync only the podcasts you want. Either way, you must have it set to sync ALL episodes. If you set it so it only syncs the X most recent episodes of your podcast, you will not get some or any of the ringtones.
6a. Alternatively, you could create a Smart Playlist by choosing File, Create Smart Playlist. Set the options so the “Kind” contains “Ringtones” and Live Updating is turned on. Then select the Music tab of your iPhone settings and make sure that the new Smart Playlist is set to sync to your iPhone.
7. Re-sync your iPhone to send the ringtones to it.
7a. Some people have reported that you must have at least one ringtone in your iTunes library for ringtones to appear on the left side of iTunes and for ringtones to sync at all. So you may need to download a free ringtone here and drag and drop it into your iTunes library.
8. In the Settings app of your iPhone, click on Sounds to set you default ringtone. You can also go into the Contacts app to set a specific ringtone for some of your contacts.
9. Go back to iTunes and write a review!
Also: If you are still having trouble, please contact us via email and we’ll be glad to help. You can also just go to the iPhone Ringtones page and download any ringtone individually and add them to iTunes without subscribing to the podcast. So you have plenty of options.
Enjoy the free ringtones!
